Tommy gammon bomb requires a squad that sucks at close range and sucks at moving DPS to start walking towards the tank, give up their long range advantage, and then require the tank driver to fall asleep for the 5 seconds needed to pull off this maneuvre.
Or simply have an engine damage or be behind an view blocker or stunned by sniper or target thread...
Both of those units have fausts and other combat utility (e.g., rifle grenades) to keep them useful throughout the game; Tommies do not have any kind of snare. They compensate for that with higher anti-infantry efficiency and non-combat bonuses. Not to mention the fact that T1 is dirt-cheap compared to the sum of upgrades required for Tommies.
And the question remains tommies are one of the strongest infantry before minute 1 does it the heavy cover bonuses from minute 1? NO it does not.
Is there any reason why the doctrinal trenches are CP2 and the tommies get from start? NO.
Getting tanks stunned with Gammon bombs is down to gross negligence on behalf of the vehicle user. Getting gammon bombs to work requires constant movement and concentration; in which case where is the supporting infantry?
Actually it is very easy to achieve stun lock especially with Tank hunter tommies. The argument hold little water since allies can be allot "gross negligent" with their vehicles less punishment...
If TWP was nerfed due to stun-lock same should apply to 45 mu ability.
DoT damage is a better way to balance things right. Giving high alpha damage to WASP etc means you can chase and wipe units on retreat (see flamerHT).
Chasing units can be fixed with reducing moving accuracy flamers. Being able to run around creating DOT all over the battlefield is not actually helpful. It would work allot better if it was tied to an ability.
That's how EFA engineers have worked since the dawn of time. We tried to change that and it proved unpopular. Therefore we're changing WFA to meet EFA standards.
The job of the Comet is to incentivise a T4 investment on behalf of OST and also help breakthrough AT guns; not to be hardcountered by them. If you want to hardcounter a Comet build a Panther.
Otherwise there is literally no incentive to ever build a Comet; just spam Cromwells instead.
Comet grenades are considerably weaker than other types of grenades and immobilize the tank while being thrown.
Then give EFA armies access to 5 member and LMG/ATGs...
Tommies require cover to function; especially in the late-game. If they don't require cover to do so, we'll make them. We just want to focus on fixing emplacements first.
Grenadiers need heavy cover more and they do not get, Osttruppen also. Having too much utility on mainline infantry is actually bad designs since it leaves little room for other units.
If ones moves trenches and sandbags to R.Eng., tommies will still have access to them in late game but they will be unable to lock sector early when anti-cover/anti-garrison options are not available.
The baseline for the Heavy Gammon bomb is the satchel, towards which it has been normalized. Bundle grenades have a 40MU cost, a significantly longer throw range, and a significantly shorter fuse time. If you are losing infantry models to satchels/heavy gammon bombs that's more down to negligence than anything else.
Actually it is not about me and losing infantry to gammon bombs, its about being able to "stun lock" a tank with gammon bombs from 2 tommies squads.
These abilities can be used against infantry/fortification and vehicles for little more cost than bundle grenade. They are simply too cost efficient.
WASP doesn't have a retreat button, unlike engineer squads. You can see one coming from a mile away, and 50 seconds of build-up time is more than enough to make preparations for it. Either get a raketenwerfer or plan to get a Vet1 MG.
And flamer engineer do get pinned and lose models on approach to garrison. WASP can use the flamer behind shot blockers and so no you might not actually see it coming. My suggestion has is not limited to Wasp but to all flamer vehicles. They can be balanced far better if the DOT is available as an ability and not always on.
All flamer upgrades actually do give repair AND fighting utility to the engineers that affect them.
For EFA, we kept their repair speeds intact (1.6 at Vet0, +1 at Vet2). Flamers make it a near guarantee you will hit Vet2 and, therefore get repairs. EFA minesweeper engineers aren't that fortunate; with high probability they will not hit Vet2.
For WFA, we assumed that half EFA engineers will hit Vet2 and half of them will not. Therefore, for WFA we gave the same Vet0 repair speed as EFA, but cut Vet2 repair speed bonus to half.
The Heavy sapper bonus makes it so that a 4-man Vet2 heavy sapper will repair at the same speed as a 4-man vet2 EFA engineer. The 5-man upgrade inflates Sapper cost to 236MP, which makes it kinda fair.
Flamer do not give any repair bonus to engineers it is the veterancy that gives it to them. And that also should change engineers should either be good at fighting or repairing not at both.
Have you actually used the Comet in-game vs the new OKW and the new OST? Does it really require additional nerfs?
It is not a matter of a nerf it matter of being able to counter ATGs that should actually be able to hard counter a Main battle tank. Grenades as an ability is not need on MBT it is under-performing it should receive other buff and not abilities that allow it to charge on atgs.
I would suggest removing sandbags and trenches from tommies or at least have the require T2 (same goes for all most mainline infantry).
Only units like the live conscripts should be able to built heavy cover.
"Mills Bombs
We feel that Mills Bombs are very often skipped. We feel that the primary reason for this is the disparity of Manpower Costs between mainline teching and optional upgrades.
- MP cost reduced from 150MP to 80MP
- Now required for Comet/Churchill grenades"
Grenades should simply be removed from Comet. Thee is no reason why such a fast tank that can destroy pak from distance with WP should also get sort range grenades.
"Heavy Gammon bomb
- Cost to 45MU
- Damage now on par with Soviet satchel"
Price is too low since it more cost efficient than base line which is bundle grenade.
"Heavy Sappers upgrade
We find that the trade-offs involved in the upgrade are too extreme making counterplay options too narrow. This limits the number of strategies possible both by the British player and those by their opponents.
- From +100% construction +30% construction speed
- From +1 armour to +0.25
- From posture penalty to -25% speed
- Vickers_K now takes 1 slot item
- (see repairs for repair speed changes)"
There is no reason for upgrade to give both fighting and repair bonuses especially since R.Eng. is far more cost efficient that the baseline pioneers.
Either separate into to 2 different upgrades one as fighting unit 1 repair unit or chose between one upgrade.
"WASP
- Cost/delay from 90MU/20 secs to 70MU/50 secs
- Now also reduces received experience by a factor of 0.5
- Increased number of dots from 1 to 2 per shot
- Garrison damage multiplier from 1.25 to 1"
Have vehicle flamer work as hand held and make DOT as an ability. That will help balance flamer vehicles.
"Brit Sniper
We feel that using the 25 pounders shouldn’t be as available to the Sniper, given 25 pounder increased potency.
- No longer benefits from RA cover bonus
- Now requires Veterancy 1 to use 25-pounders
- Marker flare range reduced from 35 to 30"
Most stun have been fixed so should sniper shots vs unturreted vehicles.
(neither OST nor OKW infantry has changed since then).
OKW infantry have changed in the MOD rather dramatically actually...
Instead of shifting balance around why don't you fix long standing issues with units like:
Vet bonuses
example does the added armor offer an true advantage to stug?
Does 20+ reinforce range benefit the quad or the FHT?
Why should grenadiers get only a single bonus at vet1?
Why Partisan PS should get more penetration and be better at the hands of partisans than trained troops?
Do allied TD need even more accuracy with veterancy while they can easily snipe enemy tanks at max range?
Vet abilities
too common among offering little to units AND most of the do not scale with veterancy creating either a pick in performance or little affect at all (blitzkrieg vs cap Territory).
Vet bonuses and abilities are tools that solidify the role of units and increase diversity by ringing more to the table.
Before one even tries to fix the emplacements one needs to decide what their design role is.
For instance what is the point of allowing the mortar to be packed up not just give normal mortar to faction?
What is the point of refund if one can built cheaper emplacements than other faction and then refund them:
Example the mortar cost 200 while the Ostheer 240 if one build one and tires down one has only pay 60 manpower which the mortar can make up by simply killing 2 grenadier models.
Why should the stock bofors be so much powerful than OKW doctrinal AA and be still has the option to be dismantled? or the same could be said for 17p and the Pak44.
I would suggest the following:
1) Decide the role of emplacements
2) make emplacements less durable during built.
3) Give at least 2 stock option to counter emplacement to each faction and even some dedicated doctrinal options (like stuka dive bomb for instance)
4) Make emplacement efficiency depended on how much someone actually invests on them either by hammer/anvil choices or by other tech costs (or via commanders.), so it actually a strategic choice and not a free option.
(Although I away and can not test in the mod I still feel thatImo the WFA again loses the base line:
The majority of units are more cost efficient than what should be the baseline Ostheer.
Tommies for instance cost only 20 MP (but have no tech cost) to buy, beat Grenadier at all ranges, bleed the same, but scale far better. Generally they are more cost efficient.
Cromwell is more cost efficient than Panzer IV yet it faces less cost efficient TD.
The list can go on but they questions remains,
does any actually compare thing with base line?
Why is so much effort is put in emplacements and not units?
My suggestions would be:
1) compare the units with your baseline and try to make them cost efficient based on that.
2) Fix units and then try to tackle other complicated issues like emplacements.
The differences between the forward assembly and a Command Bunker in the mod are:
- The Command Bunker is more durable (size footprint/HP)
- The Command Bunker can still reinforce even when the territory is cut off
- The Command Bunker is not the only way to obtain on-field reinforcements for OST; Forward Assembly is.
British artillery is still locked behind a global 80 seconds barrage. Not picking medkits means you cannot heal on the field, and you can also not heal while moving.
Command bunker is more expensive, supports weaker infantry, does not work FRP and can not call in artillery.
Since you set EFA as the base line imo you should use your baseline to determine the cost efficiency of the other units...
80 seconds is not a real limitation for a dirty cheap ability.
Having mainline infantry with LOS better than scout infantry (+50 at vet 1) able to call in arty can prove very problematic.
"Base 25 pounders
We are changing 25 pounders so that they become effective as a fast-response artillery that can be used to negate buildings or take down enemy emplacements. This is something that the British were particularly inadept at, so far.
Airburst changes make it so that teching Anvil will allow the 25 pounder barrage to also double as an area-denial ability.
Damage
- First Howitzer now fires 4 shells (down from 6)
- Second Howitzer now fires 5 shells (down from 6) and reload time to 4 (from 4.7)
- HE shell AoE/Penetration increased to Sexton levels
Scatter
The goal of scatter changes is to make barrage predictable regardless of map size.
- First howitzer has 0 angle scatter and 5 scatter-max and 1 scatter-ratio (i.e., relatively accurate)
- Second howitzer has 7.5 angle scatter, 12 scatter-max and 1 scatter-ratio
(original scatter for both Howitzers was 9.25 angle, 18.5 scatter-max, 0.074 scatter ratio)
- Airburst shells have a randomized 3-10 second interval between them and come with increased scatter radius (from 7 radius to 20 radius)
- The barrage becomes inaccurate if vision of the target location is not maintained
Responsiveness
- Howitzer rotation rate and responsiveness increased
- Shell speed increased from 29 to 40
Usage/Cooldown
- 80 second cooldown"
This ability will become spamable since it is dirty cheap and available to too many units.
My suggestion would be to replace pyrotechnics to an upgrade similar to Coh1 where the upgraded unit loses all bonuses/penalties from cover get the scoped lee Enfield but loses all weapon slots. Then they can use arty but for more MU.
Vet 1 for tommies could be replaced with something else.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
